I was no longer joined Sep 28, 2011

This is me, ranting through my blog: I don't do this often, but I suppose that this is what blogs are for. It may be expected (based on the very definition of the term "blog") that one who does blog would do so regularly. However, I am not such a person: I will not blog at any time other than such a time during which I feel inclined to do so. If anyone who may come to read my blog feels that I should obligate myself with such a task as to regularly update my blog, I have a few choice words for you: I like cookies.

No blogs were found matching the criteria specified. We suggest you try the blog list with no filter applied, to browse all available. Join now to share your own content, we welcome creators and consumers alike and look forward to your comments.

"The only requirement to being an Atheist is that you believe that God does not exist." - that's not entirely truth. I don't believe, it's my guess. Guess supported by science.

Every religion has some way to pray, something to pray to and something special (like pope, or journey to Mekka). We have not. We have no prayers, no fetish, no Godlike idol. No holy places, no holy book, no holy hell. Atheism is not religion, that's the point.

"Advancing society and advancing technology are not the same."
Really? technology is what makes our lives easier,more affordable. Society did not change much through all these centuries. You think we can sit down and think "Well, we did wrong here. Lets not do so again" LOL. You are too feeble on the matter of human psyche.
"
I believe that technology is neutral, but also that people aren't:
"
Good one. People are ambitious. Dont expect neutrality from greed.

"So much of our technology is severely misused: mass networking (the media), modern weaponry, medicine ("there's a pill for everything"), surveillance, chemical warfare, mass production (increase quantity - decrease quality), the use of cloning, genetic engineering, etc.
"
Mass networking is a good thing,
Modern weaponary is unavoidable(The military is a difficult thing to consider)
Modern medicine is the reason you are alive today.
Surveilance is a double edged sword.CCTV cameras are useful to prevent crime.
Chemical warfare. A bad thing indeed but you can blame human morality for that.
Mass production. Blame human greed.
Cloning and genetic engineering are good things. Cloning has no negative impact. I would love to clone my self and raise myself as a child.With genetic engineering, I would remove all the genetic diseases I have in my clone,creating a healthy individual.
Whats bad there? playing god ? Well,if you think playing god is bad then you should stop masacre-ing ants,flies,bees,termintes and bacteria, cuz you play god with those aswell.

This is a link to an article I found on the negative affects of technology on children. I believe that it supports many of my ideas that you disputed before: Personal.psu.edu

These are links to articles from the "Cracked" website regarding the potential negative effects of genetic engineering: (the "Africanized Honeybee" or "Killer Bee" is what I'm talking about): Cracked.com and Cracked.com

On genetic engineering and cloning:
I have to admit, part of what deters me from genetic engineering and cloning is morality - I am a Christian after all.

However, there is certainly more to it than that. Take the Killer Bees for example:

Beekeeper Warwick E. Kerr didn't want to create an evil super-aggressive nightmare bug that he could use to take over the world, he just wanted a normal honeybee that could survive in the jungle.

His intentions were purely to enhance efficiency and make some aspect of life easier. But it didn't work out that way; he made mistakes that are still affecting us several decades later.

These bees are extremely aggressive, extremely territorial, they spread rapidly, and while there may be a low death:attack ratio, their attack rate will increase as they spread.
[An infographic on Killer Bees]: Propacificbee.com

My point is that, considering the cause and effect proportionally, it took very little (cross-breeding two creatures that naturally would never have encountered each other) to yield an extreme result (A significantly more dangerous creature that is rapidly spreading across the Western Hemisphere, and that we - its creators - still have no practical way of stopping).

What if this is consistent in human-level engineering? That is to say, if we want to manipulate human beings (creatures that can obviously have a much more profound effect on the world than honeybees), and we make a large enough mistake, how severe might the consequences be?

Finally, I'd like to clarify the intended meaning behind what I wrote before:

I don't think that human beings are simply in-compatible with a certain level of technology (though I do believe that may be possible), what I believe is that technology is advancing at a much greater rate than society's ability to understand it, and that because of peoples lack of understanding, much of the technology that does exist is "severely misused."